Howdy all. Let the flames begin! I'd flame myself too!
I made the horrendous mistake of installing AOL over a weekend for their trial so I could quickly download Netscape's installer which I'm ultimately using now. I've canceled my AOL account, cleaned out the registry, set my only T-Bird SMTP server to my site, had it working for a couple of days, etc. Now somehow, AOL (aka "Big Brother) manipulated itself as my sole SMTP server, thus preventing me from sending messages (I can receive all day long).
Now, someone tell ME that AOL isn't taking over PCs.;-)
I operate four sites based on an open-source CMS application using PHP and MySQL (more open-source of course!). I've made various tweaks to the sites over the years but have always been extremely thankful to the application's developer community, even having gone so far as financially supporting their continued devlopment. I figure it's the least I can do to help them with their efforts since these sites are generating a large portion of my bread and butter.
Is it possible for developers to make money off of their efforts even if they "give" their software away? Most definitely. Because, while they may have many whom don't offer financial support, they will have many whom will and, at the same time, further expand their effort's presence.
...several WISP-related organizations are pursuing w/ the FCC regarding the devotion of certain spectrum slices specifically for broadband usage. Sure, there are LMDS and MMDS pieces of spectrum available but at, easily, several hundreds of thousands of dollars, these licenses aren't usually readily available to the typical wireless ISP.
Howdy all. Definitely an interesting topic. I had the "pleasure" of working for corporate America for a financial services company several years ago. I was part of 150 in my department to be layed off due to cutbacks. So, I scrambled to find a job (difficult considering several thousand overall in our area were layed off) and finally ended up with a small newspaper publishing software company. But, I was working in a kennel scraping dogshit from the floor, landscaping and in a freezer wearing subzero suits.
I'm still working part-time as a librarian along with getting my niche website underway (650 uniques a day and climbing).
I'm a bit concerned for smaller providers, particularly those in rural areas that cost-effectively deploy wireless broadband networks where traditional broadband cannot be obtained. My concern is only because, IMHO, Verizon's using the law to back them up simply because they cannot deploy fast enough and, if they can't, no one else should be able to. It's been said that Verizon has spent $8.5 billion over the past 10 years in Pennsylvania. I live in Pennsylvania and see more fiber from the local telcos than I do from Verizon. I also see WISPs deploying networks much more quickly and offering simple 128kbps service for under $20 per month. I've been told my servicing CO doesn't even have DSL capability (yep, it's a Verizon CO) and that Verizon has no interest in throwing DSLAMs in there because the "market isn't there."
Perhaps the law will side with the "little guys" and crush Verizon.:)
IMHO, this is going to create lots of opportunities for small providers, particularly those in rural locations like wireless ISPs and municipally run networks. They'll be able to provide excellent customer service while keeping the costs affordable. This might be a blessing in disguise for the "mom and pop" ISPs. Just my two cents.:)
What's interesting about this is that WiMAX is available only in licensed spectrum sets for now. It's not yet available for unlicensed frequencies that typical WISPs usually use, i.e. 2.4GHz and 5GHz. There are several manufacturers producting WiMAX gear, however, they're basically not yet usable by the general public unless someone has a license for the freqs they run in.
It'll be huge, however, once its available to the rest of us.:-)
Yeah, you guys just need to start selling it. It's only been "testing" for over a year now. The software that's supposedly $30 and works with standard 802.11b clients been "available" on your site for months now...but, not really because anytime MeshNetworks was contacted, we were told "not ready yet."
Thx much for the excellent info, Detritus. I didn't see where XM has filed for a license for use within the 2.4GHz band other than when they tried to petition the FCC for exclusitivity of the band. If they have a license for use of that band, OTOH, is having over 1,300 watts an acceptable power output? Not sure if there's a cap or not concerning power output.
Actually, we're looking to do that for a subdivision project we're working on via a centrally located MP3 server that's hooked up to a meshed 802.11b network. It'll allow those with iPaqs or anything that supports an 802.11b card to stream the MP3's over the wireless infrastructure.
Well, actually, they were blocked from interfering with WISP providers utilizing the 2.4GHz spectrum since it's unlicensed and open to anyone via a petition filed via WECA, however, I know for a fact XM is running a remote repeater on a 700' FM tower I'm trying to install a WiPOP on that's running at 1,300 watts in the unlicensed 2.4GHz band which seems to me to be highly illegal and unethical.
Well, the WET11 is simply the unit providing wireless connectivity. There needs to be some kind of box that'll store the mesh software which could be something as simple as being compact flash-based. There are companies working on OEMing the WET11 with Linksys by using their own NEMA-style enclosures with the WET11 hardware. The MOBO and WET11 could reside in the box to allow for outdoor access and be powered over Ethernet which would eliminate the need to keep the host PC on all the time.
We've been looking for a software solution similar to MeshNetworks' application but haven't seen anything on the market except for the hardware-based gear like Nokia's RoofTop. MeshNetworks is promising but they're very slow to implement and have been spewing teaser press releases for almost a year now.
We've been working on a semi-mesh initiative by engineering gear from the Orinoco line for a 1,700 home subdivision but the Locust software may allow us to create a full-mesh deployment.
That's why you want to alternate the three channels at the AP side but if a provider is deploying in that dense an area, it's probably best to use FHSS gear which allows up to 15 AP's to colocate on a single array vs. three AP's for DSSS gear.
Too bad they've been testing for years now and have yet to produce a commercial application. I've been in touch with them I don't know how many times and have always been told "soon, soon."
If one wants to deploy a semi-mesh solution, it's fairly easy to do with standard off-the-shelf 802.11b gear via active repeaters and a little engineering.
Re:RF wireless isn't going to around for long
on
Cable Without Cables
·
· Score: 1
Problem with free space optical networks is that the highter the frequency, the more prone they are to weather and LOS issues. Yes, they can offer extremely high bandwidth rates, but only up to a few blocks away and certainly not if a bird or extreme weather is within LOS.
Slashdot Mirror
Howdy all. Let the flames begin! I'd flame myself too!
;-)
I made the horrendous mistake of installing AOL over a weekend for their trial so I could quickly download Netscape's installer which I'm ultimately using now. I've canceled my AOL account, cleaned out the registry, set my only T-Bird SMTP server to my site, had it working for a couple of days, etc. Now somehow, AOL (aka "Big Brother) manipulated itself as my sole SMTP server, thus preventing me from sending messages (I can receive all day long).
Now, someone tell ME that AOL isn't taking over PCs.
Regards,
Kory
I operate four sites based on an open-source CMS application using PHP and MySQL (more open-source of course!). I've made various tweaks to the sites over the years but have always been extremely thankful to the application's developer community, even having gone so far as financially supporting their continued devlopment. I figure it's the least I can do to help them with their efforts since these sites are generating a large portion of my bread and butter.
:-)
Is it possible for developers to make money off of their efforts even if they "give" their software away? Most definitely. Because, while they may have many whom don't offer financial support, they will have many whom will and, at the same time, further expand their effort's presence.
Just my two cents.
Regards,
Kory
...several WISP-related organizations are pursuing w/ the FCC regarding the devotion of certain spectrum slices specifically for broadband usage. Sure, there are LMDS and MMDS pieces of spectrum available but at, easily, several hundreds of thousands of dollars, these licenses aren't usually readily available to the typical wireless ISP.
:-)
Check out WISPA for one group's involvement.
I guess we'll see.
Regards,
Kory
Howdy all. Definitely an interesting topic. I had the "pleasure" of working for corporate America for a financial services company several years ago. I was part of 150 in my department to be layed off due to cutbacks. So, I scrambled to find a job (difficult considering several thousand overall in our area were layed off) and finally ended up with a small newspaper publishing software company. But, I was working in a kennel scraping dogshit from the floor, landscaping and in a freezer wearing subzero suits.
:-)
I'm still working part-time as a librarian along with getting my niche website underway (650 uniques a day and climbing).
So, I guess I'm a blue collar "half breed."
Regards,
Kory
I'm a bit concerned for smaller providers, particularly those in rural areas that cost-effectively deploy wireless broadband networks where traditional broadband cannot be obtained. My concern is only because, IMHO, Verizon's using the law to back them up simply because they cannot deploy fast enough and, if they can't, no one else should be able to. It's been said that Verizon has spent $8.5 billion over the past 10 years in Pennsylvania. I live in Pennsylvania and see more fiber from the local telcos than I do from Verizon. I also see WISPs deploying networks much more quickly and offering simple 128kbps service for under $20 per month. I've been told my servicing CO doesn't even have DSL capability (yep, it's a Verizon CO) and that Verizon has no interest in throwing DSLAMs in there because the "market isn't there."
:)
Perhaps the law will side with the "little guys" and crush Verizon.
Regards,
Kory
IMHO, this is going to create lots of opportunities for small providers, particularly those in rural locations like wireless ISPs and municipally run networks. They'll be able to provide excellent customer service while keeping the costs affordable. This might be a blessing in disguise for the "mom and pop" ISPs. Just my two cents. :)
Regards,
Kory
I can actually say that I live near one of the companies that headed this project. Amazing what our little rural Pa. town can do from time to time (too bad about Agere Systems, though.)
:)
Just hope they build one here eventually!
What's interesting about this is that WiMAX is available only in licensed spectrum sets for now. It's not yet available for unlicensed frequencies that typical WISPs usually use, i.e. 2.4GHz and 5GHz. There are several manufacturers producting WiMAX gear, however, they're basically not yet usable by the general public unless someone has a license for the freqs they run in.
:-)
It'll be huge, however, once its available to the rest of us.
Regards,
Kory
Here's another for WiMAX research:
a x&submit=Search
http://www.wispdirectory.com/blog/index.php?s=wim
Also, http://www.wispdirectory.com/ has additional WiMAX info.
Yeah, you guys just need to start selling it. It's only been "testing" for over a year now. The software that's supposedly $30 and works with standard 802.11b clients been "available" on your site for months now...but, not really because anytime MeshNetworks was contacted, we were told "not ready yet."
Give us a break....
Thx much for the excellent info, Detritus. I didn't see where XM has filed for a license for use within the 2.4GHz band other than when they tried to petition the FCC for exclusitivity of the band. If they have a license for use of that band, OTOH, is having over 1,300 watts an acceptable power output? Not sure if there's a cap or not concerning power output.
:-)
Thx!
Actually, we're looking to do that for a subdivision project we're working on via a centrally located MP3 server that's hooked up to a meshed 802.11b network. It'll allow those with iPaqs or anything that supports an 802.11b card to stream the MP3's over the wireless infrastructure.
:D
I'm all for it!
Well, actually, they were blocked from interfering with WISP providers utilizing the 2.4GHz spectrum since it's unlicensed and open to anyone via a petition filed via WECA, however, I know for a fact XM is running a remote repeater on a 700' FM tower I'm trying to install a WiPOP on that's running at 1,300 watts in the unlicensed 2.4GHz band which seems to me to be highly illegal and unethical.
:)
Just my two cents.
Well, the WET11 is simply the unit providing wireless connectivity. There needs to be some kind of box that'll store the mesh software which could be something as simple as being compact flash-based. There are companies working on OEMing the WET11 with Linksys by using their own NEMA-style enclosures with the WET11 hardware. The MOBO and WET11 could reside in the box to allow for outdoor access and be powered over Ethernet which would eliminate the need to keep the host PC on all the time.
Could probably use a Linksys WET11 Ethernet bridge for about $100 to $130. No need to crack open a desktop case. :)
We've been looking for a software solution similar to MeshNetworks' application but haven't seen anything on the market except for the hardware-based gear like Nokia's RoofTop. MeshNetworks is promising but they're very slow to implement and have been spewing teaser press releases for almost a year now.
:-)
We've been working on a semi-mesh initiative by engineering gear from the Orinoco line for a 1,700 home subdivision but the Locust software may allow us to create a full-mesh deployment.
Thx much for the excellent submittal!
That's why you want to alternate the three channels at the AP side but if a provider is deploying in that dense an area, it's probably best to use FHSS gear which allows up to 15 AP's to colocate on a single array vs. three AP's for DSSS gear.
That's why active repeaters in a semi-mesh topology would probably work better provided one keeps the number of hops down.
Too bad they've been testing for years now and have yet to produce a commercial application. I've been in touch with them I don't know how many times and have always been told "soon, soon."
:-)
If one wants to deploy a semi-mesh solution, it's fairly easy to do with standard off-the-shelf 802.11b gear via active repeaters and a little engineering.
Just my two cents.
http://www.usda.gov/rus/telecom/broadband.htm
_ initiatives.htm#broadband
http://www.usda.gov/rus/telecom/initiatives/index
The "largest WISP in the metro Omaha area"? I'm just curious as to why your website is under construction. :-)
I can almost hear the Budweiser commercial for this one! :-)
Guess I need to run YDL for sure on my B&W's now. :-(
Here's a fairly new example of a Wiki being used to develop an online community for the public wireless network in Richmond, Virginia:
http://www.richmondfreewireless.org
Problem with free space optical networks is that the highter the frequency, the more prone they are to weather and LOS issues. Yes, they can offer extremely high bandwidth rates, but only up to a few blocks away and certainly not if a bird or extreme weather is within LOS.
RF's going to be around for sometime:
http://www.bbwexchange.com
http://www.bbwexchange.com/wisps/
http://www.dslreports.com/forum/dslalt
http://www.isp-wireless.com